17000 From: James Date: Sun Nov 17, 2002 9:13am Subject: [dsg] Re: "what is awareness. Jon, I feel that these are excellent observations, reflective of deep insight. Therefore, humbly, I have a line of questioning(s) for you (or others on-list) if you may consider it/them: What do you relect about the usefulness of koans in disrupting discursive thought to reach pure awareness? Is there a significant difference between discursive thought and pure awareness? If so, what is that difference? Do you believe it is possible to disrupt discursive thought, or simply to minimize it? Is either necessary for pure awareness? Could the Abhidhamma be viewed as a method of turning discursive thought into a vehicle for pure awareness (like an 'Intellectual Koan') or is it pure awareness itself? Thank you for considering my questions. Metta, James ps. For ESL members: dis·cur·sive ( P ) Pronunciation Key (d- skûrsv)adj. Covering a wide field of subjects; rambling. Proceeding to a conclusion through reason rather than intuition. 17001 From: Date: Sun Nov 17, 2002 0:11pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Way 25, Comm. Hi Christine, Thanks for this link concerning the hindrances and their abandonment. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/wheels/wheel026.html I think it deserves careful study. Maybe I'll post some excerpts. It occured to me that insight as a remedy for the hindrances belongs in the dhammanupassana section where they are taken as object. In this section, Way 25, they are treated in a more conventional way that is applied to any practice of satipatthana or jhana. What are your thoughts on this section and satipatthana up to this point? I notice you never have any questions or comments. Not interested? Larry 17002 From: christine_forsyth Date: Sun Nov 17, 2002 0:53pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Way 25, Comm. Hi Larry, :) I just knew you were going to ask about my interest at some point. Sorry for the silence, but please don't interpret it as lack of interest or support. I am vitally interested, but way behind. I am just having one of those periods from Hell at work, barely treading water, so can reply to posts that only require a little rambling thought but I don't currently have the energy/ability to apply reason, study, or reflect intelligently on scripture. Also trying to read and understand some of K. Sujin's 'Survey' (in the Files Section) before leaving for Hong Kong and Bangkok next Sunday. I read all the posts you put up Larry, and I'm taking 'Way of Mindfulness' with me - with some of the additional posts printed off as well. I've ruled a line after each of your Way posts and listed the additional posts made on that section, so I can quickly revise and catch up. Having three weeks off work should give me the delightful and refreshing opportunity to immerse myself in the Dhamma. :) Then you'll probaby groan when you see my name appear on the Posts List. :) I hope you know how grateful I am that you undertook the onerous job of conscientiouly posting the excerpts - I know you also will have times when work or private worlds can feel overwhelming - but you still do not fail us. Your interest and enthusiam is infectious, and I look forward to being more active in The Way corner in a week or so. with admiration, gratitude and metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., LBIDD@w... wrote: > Hi Christine, > > Thanks for this link concerning the hindrances and their abandonment. > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/wheels/wheel026.html > > I think it deserves careful study. Maybe I'll post some excerpts. It > occured to me that insight as a remedy for the hindrances belongs in the > dhammanupassana section where they are taken as object. In this section, > Way 25, they are treated in a more conventional way that is applied to > any practice of satipatthana or jhana. > > What are your thoughts on this section and satipatthana up to this > point? I notice you never have any questions or comments. Not > interested? > > Larry 17003 From: Date: Sun Nov 17, 2002 4:33pm Subject: Way 26, Comm. "The Way of Mindfulness" by Soma Thera http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/misc/wayof.html Commentary continued on, "a bhikkhu lives contemplating the body in the body, ardent, clearly comprehending, and mindful, having overcome in this world covetousness and grief." By the instruction dealing with the overcoming of covetousness and grief, yogic power and yogic skill are shown. [Tika] Yogic power is the power of meditation. Yogic skill is dexterity in yoking oneself in meditation. Freedom from satisfaction and discontent in regard to bodily happiness and misery, the forbearing from delighting in the body, the bearing-up of non-delight in the course of body-contemplation, the state of being not captivated by the unreal, and the state of not running away from the real -- these, when practiced produce yogic power; and the ability to practice these is yogic skill. There is another method of interpretation of the passage: (A bhikkhu) lives contemplating the body in the body, ardent, and so forth. "Contemplating" refers to the subject of meditation. "Lives": lives protecting the subject of meditation which here is the body. In the passage beginning with "ardent", Right Exertion [sammappadhana] is stated by energy [atapa]; the subject of meditation proper in all circumstances [sabbatthika kammatthana] or the means of protecting the subject of meditation [kammatthana pariharana upaya], is stated by mindfulness and clear comprehension [sati sampajañña]; or the quietude that is obtained [patiladdha samatha] by way of the contemplation on the body [kayanupassana] is stated by mindfulness; insight [vipassana] by clear comprehension; and the fruit of inner culture [bhavana phala] through the overcoming of covetousness and grief [abhijjha domanassa vinaya]. [T] The subject of meditation useful in all circumstances is stated by referring to (the laying hold on) mindfulness and clear comprehension, because through the force of these two qualities there is the protection of the subject of meditation and suitability of attention for its unbroken practice. [T] Further, of these two qualities, mindfulness and clear comprehension, the following is stated in the commentary to the Atthasalini, Mula Tika, "To all who have yoked themselves to the practice of any subject of meditation, to all yogis, these two are things helpful, at all times, for the removal of obstruction and the increase of inner culture." 17004 From: Date: Sun Nov 17, 2002 4:40pm Subject: commentary break Dear group, At this point we will take approximately a one month break in posting further excerpts from the Satipatthana Sutta Commentary. However we could continue to discuss, particularly on the points we have touched on so far and any additional material anyone would like to bring in would be most welcome. Larry 17005 From: robmoult Date: Sun Nov 17, 2002 5:46pm Subject: Proximate Cause of Unpleasant Mental Feeling Hi All, According to the Visuddhi Magga (XIV 128), the proximate cause of unpleasant mental feeling (domanassa) is "heart basis". I am using the BPS version of Visuddhi Magga. Can somebody check another version to see if this should be "heart base" (hadaya vatthu). This section of the Visuddhi Magga mentions the characterisitic / function / manifestation / proximate cause for all five types of feeling. Everything makes sense to me except for the proximate cause of domanassa. I cannot see how heart base could be the proximate cause. Any ideas? Thanks, Rob M :-) 17006 From: Date: Sun Nov 17, 2002 7:48pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Proximate Cause of Unpleasant Mental Feeling Hi Rob, "Heart basis" is how Bh Nyanamoli translates "hadaya-vatthu", see index under "heart". I don't understand either joy or grief. How can tranquility be the proximate cause of joy (somanasa)? What is the heart basis? Larry 17007 From: Date: Sun Nov 17, 2002 8:38pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Proximate Cause of Unpleasant Mental Feeling Hi again Rob, Heart base is proximate cause of unpleasant mental feeling in the same sense as body faculty is proximate cause of pleasure or pain. Here 'proximate cause' apparently means 'base'. B. Bodhi suggests another way of looking at proximate cause would have 'contact' as p.c. Following that logic I would say heart base would be the 'base' proximate cause of pleasant mental feeling also. Apparently the commentaries say tranquility (passaddhi) is proximate cause only of meditative pleasant mental feeling. Larry 17008 From: Sarah Date: Sun Nov 17, 2002 9:40pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Proximate Cause of Unpleasant Mental Feeling Hi Rob M & Larry, This is an interesting discussion you’re having and you're raising difficult qus. I think as Larry says, heart base is proximate cause because it is base oo support for mind-door consciousness and mental states in the way that eye-base is the support for seeing and body faculty for (bodily) pleasure and pain. I believe one or two other kinds of consciousness, such as santirana (investigating) consciousness have heart base as proximate cause too. I’ve never questioned why tranquillity (pasaddhi)is the proximate cause of pleasant mental feeling before and any comments are speculative on my part only.(Larry, yr comments just given are v.interesting. Can you give me a reference to where the commentaries discuss tranquility as prox cause for ‘meditative pleasant mental feeling’ only, which makes sense. I take ‘meditative’ to refer to sobhana which raises the qu of unwholesome pleasant mental feelings....) From the Atthasalini, kaya passaddhi and citta passaddhi(the 2 kinds of calm - of cittas and cetaskikas) “taken together have the characteristic of pacifying the suffering of both mental factors and of consciousness; the function of crushing the suffering of both; and have mental factors and consciousness as proximate cause. They are the opponents of the corruptions, such as distraction (uddhacca), which cause the disturbance of mental factors and of consciousness.”(1,iV,ch1-130). From the Sammohavinodani, they are also defined as the “tranquillisation of distress” in the aggregates and consciousness. In other words, they are the opposite of uddhacca (restlessness) which accompanies all unwholesome states including lobha (attachment, so perhaps this ‘tranquillisation of distress’ or ‘pacifying the suffering’aspect is the reason it is prox cause??? Just thinking out loud. As we know, there are always many conditions at work, not just prox cause. In case you haven’t seen it, there is an interesting note in the BPS Visuddhimagga (X1V, n26)on the ‘heart-basis’. It gives an indication of how carefully we have to read the texts (esp. abhidhamma and commentaries) before jumping to any conclusions about ‘inconsistency’. Anyway, the first part is this: “The heart-basis....the support for the mind-element anf for the mind-consciousness-element”:how is that to be known? 1)From scriptures and 2)from logical reasoning. ‘the scripture is this: “The materiality dependent on which the mind-element and mind-consciousness-element occur is a condition, as a support condition, for the mind-element and the mind-consciousness-element and what is associated therewith (Ptn 1,4)” ***** There has also been quite a lot of discussion on hadaya-vatthu (heart-base) before on DSG. Those who are interested/sceptical, may find it helpful to read the posts under heart or hadaya in “useful posts”. Rob K wrote several detailed ones. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/ Thanks again Rob M and Larry. Keep discussing and I’ll also try to raise any points left unresolved on proximate causes when we are in Bkk. Sarah ====== 17009 From: Date: Sun Nov 17, 2002 10:25pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Proximate Cause of Unpleasant Mental Feeling Hi Sarah, I got the bit about tranquility being only the proximate cause of pleasant meditative feeling from B. Bodhi's note 1 in ch. 3 of CMA. There are so many different kinds of pleasant mental feeling I couldn't sort it out. One difficulty with saying heart base is proximate cause of all pleasant mental feeling is that there are no physical bases in the immaterial plane. Is there pleasant mental feeling there? Also I didn't understand the proximate cause of equanimity (neutral feeling): "Its proximate cause is consciousness without happiness."[piti] Does that have a physical base or not with respect to immaterial or other planes/spheres (eg. supramundane consciousness)? There is a footnote on this in Vism that I didn't understand at all. Larry 17010 From: Sarah Date: Sun Nov 17, 2002 10:31pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Getting into Abhidhamma Hi Wendy, --- Uan Chih Liu wrote: > Hi all, > When I join this group, frankly I was really lost. And finally Robert > was kind enough to point me to Nina's "Abhidhamma in Daily Life". > I was wondering, if it's possible and feasible, to add a link or a file, > named "Beginner's Guide", where a list of links are given and > possibly ordered by degree of difficulties for the study of > Abhidhamma? .... You raise some sensible and practical suggestions here. Like you are finding, ADL has also been invaluable for me....when I first read the first couple of pages ( a long time ago) they had a great impact. Not everyone responds in the same way, however (ask James.....well, maybe don’t ask;-)). Seriously, there is a section in the U.P. for “New to the list and New to Dhamma” and one for “Pali links” (or sth similar). I think a section for Abhidhamma - Beginner’s Guide would be very helpful, if anyone, like CHRISTINE, would like to write a post as you suggest above with links and some kind of ‘order of difficulty’ as she did for the Pali one. Of course, any list or suggestions are always ‘personal’, and as we see here, the interests and ways of study are very different. Perhaps you can also write a post with your suggestions when you feel able/willing to do this. In the bookmarks section, there are links to several websites containing a lot of helpful material too, but I know this can be somewht overwhelming without guidance. For me, I’ve never separated abhidhamma from other parts of the tipitaka and never considered any of the sections separately or ever formally studied abhidhamma. I consider the realities appearing now in daily life to be abhidhamma and without the understanding of elements, of phenomena and of anatta (at least intellectually), I’m not sure how the suttas can be comprehended. I think you’ll also find anything on Rob K’s websites to be useful for your study. (There’s a helpful essay by a Burmese monk on abhidhamma and vipassana as well there which relates to my last point - ). http://www.abhidhamma.org/ http://www.vipassana.info/ Thanks for this prompt, Wendy and keep up your great qus and considerations. Asking the ‘right’ questions as you’re doing, can help a lot when we are lost;-) Sarah ===== 17011 From: Sarah Date: Sun Nov 17, 2002 11:32pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Pali: sati sampajanna Dear Nina & Larry, Thank you both for your excellent contributions and dialogue on the Way to-date. Nina, we’d all be quite lost without your assistance and a special thanks for the time, patience and inspiration you have been providing for us all on DSG for the last many months on all the other topics as well. I hope you and Lodevick have a good flight and we look f/w to seeing you soon. A few brief comments: 1. Nina, I found your translation notes on the sampajano, satimaa section helpful and interesting. I didn’t see the detail about the 4 meditation subjects (metta etc) in Soma Thera’s transl. Perhaps eventually there will be a complete transl of sutta, comm and sub-com. Pls don’t be concerned about grammar mistakes - as Jim always says, any traslation is a ‘work-in-progress’ and we shouldn’t wait for perfect posts or translations. 2. The reference to ‘bare mindfulness’, I take to be referring to sati (bare=just sati), so the commentator speaks of ‘energy and so forth’, i.e the other factors which are essential for satipatthana to arise as discussed before: “....Are there not many other factors of the way, namely, understanding, thinking, speech, action, livelihood, effort, and concentration, besides mindfulness? To be sure there are. But all these are implied when the Arousing of Mindfulness is mentioned, because these factors exist in union with mindfulness”. This is how I read it. I’ll be interested to hear more when you’ve looked at the Pali after your trip. ***** Nina, I also appreciated your quote from A.Sujin on patience. “There can be patience even with regard to uttering useless speech. Before we are going to speak we should consider whether what we want to say is beneficial or not. If it is not beneficial there should be patience and we should refrain from that speech, because it is not helpful for anybody. Sati-sampajañña performs its function in such matters and we should investigate whether it has further developed.>” We can see the test of what we read in the Satipatthana sutta is in daily life, ‘in all circumstances’, including all kinds of communication;-) In appreciation, Sarah ===== 17012 From: robmoult Date: Mon Nov 18, 2002 0:22am Subject: Re: [dsg] Proximate Cause of Unpleasant Mental Feeling Hi All, My interpretation of the Vis. saying that the proximate cause of equanimity being "consciousness without hapiness" relates to the fourth jhana (which has hapiness) gives away to the fifth jhana (which has equanimity). My interpretation of the Vis. saying that the proximate cause of joy being tranquility also relates to jhanas; to reach the first jhana, one must develop tranquility. So the proximate cause of equanimity and joy relate to jhanas. This leaves pain, pleasure and unpleasant mental feeling. After thinking about it, I suspect that if Vis. could not relate the state to jhana, it defaulted to a base; ergo: - Pleasure: body base - Pain: body base - Unpleasant mental feeling: heart base Does this make sense? Thanks, Rob M :-) 17013 From: Sarah Date: Mon Nov 18, 2002 0:58am Subject: Scrambled Egg-less 1 Hi James, I have a few comments I’d like to make on a few of your points from different posts, so this is going to be somewhat ‘scrambled’. 1. internet rules & standards ==================== It’s a rather sensitive subject and so I don’t want to discuss details but I’d just like to say that the argument that the ‘internet is a face-less, name-less...’ method of communciation with its own set of rules ‘accepted universally’ is only part of the picture imho and not the main determintion of whether there is any intended deception or not. As it said in the original quote I gave, if a false impression is given, it can be considered as false speech. We can only know for ourselves in this regard. If I turn up tomorrow with a cyber-name and the intention that everyone should think I’m a newcomer or should be misled in anyway, I’d consider it to be ‘lying or deceiving’. If I joined the ‘Highrise Gardeners Club’ with a cyber-name that was obviously just that, it would be different. You thought the member who was concerned about the ‘morality’ of a cyber-name and ‘started to use his own name was just being paranoid about his karma’. I disagree with your assessment and have respect for his concern . I’ve been reflecting quite a lot on right speech with my students. I’m used to playing tricks and jokes (which of course everyone enjoys). Kom, I think,quoted the part from the Rahula sutta about not even creating a false impression in fun which I can’t help reflecting on everytime I get out my collection of spiders, snakes or whatever;-( As Rob M would say, in the big course of things, these are not big-deal issues, but it doesn’t hurt to consider them. 2. Vinaya corner =========== You suggest the rules are ‘for the proper and smooth functioning of the Sangha, not as omnipresent, moral guidelines.’ I would suggest they are for both purposes. There is plenty we can learn about right speech and other aspects of morality and the danger of various kinds of unwholesome thought and action fom the rules ourselves. In a post to Larry, I wrote about the 4 kinds of morality (catuparisudhi-sila). The first was restraint with regard to the monks’ rules (patimokkha-samvara-sila): “Here the monk is restrained in accordance with the monks’ Disciplinary Code, is perfect in conduct and behaviour, and perceiving danger even in the least offences, he trains himself in the rules he has taken upon him”.(Nyantiloka dict, quoting from Vinaya sources). I take ‘perceiving danger’ as referring to the danger of accumulating unwholesome states at the present moment. ***** more 'scrambled' comments to follow very soon..... 17014 From: Sarah Date: Mon Nov 18, 2002 1:04am Subject: Re: [dsg] Scrambled Egg-less 2 contd from Scrambled 1 to James 3 Testing Abhidhamma ================= You suggest that (the abhidhamma) “From untestable, undescribed observation, it then reaches a hypothesis of the nature of ultimate and conventional reality. It doesn’t invite others to test this theory because it doesn’t give the method by which it was reached.” This was written about 3 days ago (Rubbish 1), so it may be redundant by now, I’m not sure;-). Nothing could be further from how I read and understand the abhidhamma which is described in detail and to be tested out at this very moment. The ‘method’ is that of sati sampajanna or sati and panna, assisted by other factors, as we’re discussing in the ‘Way’corner. No ‘me’ or ‘you’ to do anything. 4.Rupas ====== I’m not sure if you see rupas as ‘in’ or ‘out’ at the moment. Pls just ignore any of my comments which are no longer relevant. In Rubbish 3 you suggested the theory was ‘arrived at through simple observtion and philosophical pondering’ and ask whether it is an accurate way ‘of describing ultimate reality’ ‘Not according to modern scientific discoveries’. I agree with the last sentence, but it means little to me. The dhammas which we read about in the texts (inc the abhidhamma) were ‘arrived at’ by direct understanding, highly developed panna and the omniscience of a Buddha. As you said elsewhere, we could have a scholarly discussion about the origins which would be quite useless. The only way to test the validity of paramattha dhammas (ultimate realities) is by the development of panna. I still think you will find it usefu, nonetheless, to read the series I wrote from the Vinaya commentary, if only to understand why some of us don’t accept comments dismissing the Abhidhamma as the word/Teachings of the Buddha and how according to the commentaries, the Abhidhamma was recited (for the most part) at the 1st Council. 5. Effective dialogues =============== You gave many helpful pointers (inc. those for the ‘facilitators) which I appreciated. I don’t agree (I’m avoiding that word ‘question’ which sounded too polite to you;-))that the Buddha didn’t speak much about ‘how to conduct effective dialogues...’ However, I believe the entire Teachings could be said to be about effective dialogue. We can only communicate according to the degree of wisdom, morality and other wholesome states accumulated and also according to our tendencies and natural inclinations. We’re all bound to make plenty of mistakes as a result. Hopefully some learning is taking place for us all. As I’ve mentioned to you already, I’m really learning a lot from your generous, skilful and very imaginative posts to the starkids. They’ve really been enjoying these and the other helpful ones from everyone else and so have I. 6. DSG standards ============= “This group is excellent, but not perfect either. I mean, to let rif-raf like me in it doesn’t say much for its standards! LOL! j/k. Seriously, there is no reason to rest on any laurels. Mara will take any opportunity to strike and ‘true dialogue’ is one area where Mara excels.” Oh, yikes.....sounds like trouble...thanks for the reminder....rif-raf in dialogue with Mara is a sure recipe for nightmares.....;-) Good point about using experiences ‘to learn dharma’. maybe we also ‘learn dharma’ to use in experience. This is more than enough for now. Thank you for all the helpful topics and comments. Sarah ======= 17015 From: Sarah Date: Mon Nov 18, 2002 2:01am Subject: Re: [dsg] Proximate Cause of Unpleasant Mental Feeling Hi Rob M, Caution: I’m on very unsure ground with any comments I make on this thread....... --- robmoult wrote: > Hi All, > > My interpretation of the Vis. saying that the proximate cause of > equanimity being "consciousness without hapiness" relates to the > fourth jhana (which has hapiness) gives away to the fifth jhana > (which has equanimity). ..... Do you have any reason or reference for this? The section we’re discussing is under ‘the Agregates’ in the section on Panna (understanding) in the vism. It is referring to all kinds of feelings as I understand as included in the khandha. In the note to equanimity (n56 ) It explains from the Pm (and I’ve seen in several other places) that the seeing, hearing, smelling & tasting consciousiness might ‘logically be associated with pleasure and pain’, in fact they are ‘associated with equanimity’ because of the gentle impact ‘like that of two pieces of cotton wool’....(so Larry, I think ‘consciousness without happiness’ refers to seeing etc). > My interpretation of the Vis. saying that the proximate cause of joy > being tranquility also relates to jhanas; to reach the first jhana, > one must develop tranquility. .... I’ve just seen the note Larry skilfully found of B. Bodhi’s. It’s just a footnote of his which says “tranquillity (passaddhi), it seems, is the proximte cause only for the joyful feeling that arises in meditative development.” This would certainly make it sound like it could refer to jhanas but I’d like to know where ‘it seems’ can be found - i.e a reference and more exact details. Again, in the Vis the suggestion as I read it, is that all pleasant mental feelings are being referred to. I’m sure there must be reference in other commentaries, but I’m out of time and Tai chi is calling (Howard, I’m now using the silver balls for a new movement which is great for my wrists;-)). ..... > So the proximate cause of equanimity and joy relate to jhanas. This > leaves pain, pleasure and unpleasant mental feeling. > > After thinking about it, I suspect that if Vis. could not relate the > state to jhana, it defaulted to a base; ergo: > - Pleasure: body base > - Pain: body base > - Unpleasant mental feeling: heart base > > Does this make sense? .... It sounded good when I first saw it (as did Larry’s theories), but I’ll have to leave you to it for now;-) Sarah (rushing out) ============= 17016 From: christine_forsyth Date: Mon Nov 18, 2002 2:16am Subject: Re: [dsg] Getting into Abhidhamma Hi Wendy, and all, I hope you may find the short articles helpful to give you 'bite- sized' perspectives on the Abhidhamma. All of them helped me in some way to understand just a little, and it proved enough to give me the courage and patience to tackle longer texts. I found any questions could be confidently put to the dsg members, no question is too simple. I have also included links to some of the books, texts, and websites related to Abhidhamma. Personally, I'd read the articles first. Then your own interest will take you anywhere and everywhere. :) (I hope the links all work.) metta, Christine Article: Abhidhamma and Practice http://www.abhidhamma.org/abhidhamma_and_practice.htm Article: Be here now http://www.abhidhamma.org/be%20here%20now.htm Article: 'Abhidhamma Notes' http://www.dhammastudy.com/Introduction.html Article: Understanding Reality http://www.abhidhamma.org/understanding%20reality.html Article: 'Some Introductory Notes on Abhidhamma' http://www.baynet.net/~arcc/dhamma/abhi1.html The Abhidhamma Philosophy (about nine pages) http://www.buddhanet.net/abhidh01.htm Fourteen essays by members of a group of lay people who studied the Abhidhamma http://www.samatha.demon.co.uk/publications/abhidhammapapers/ Article: Abhidhamma and Vipassana http://www.abhidhamma.org/sitagu%20sayadaw.htm e-books online: http://www.vipassana.info/contents-vipassana.htm e-Books in multiple formats on-line: http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Articles and books graded as to level of difficulty: http://www.dhammastudy.com/engindex.html And anytime is a good time for wandering around in the dsg 'Useful Posts'. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Useful_Posts --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Sarah wrote: > Hi Wendy, > > --- Uan Chih Liu wrote: > Hi all, > > When I join this group, frankly I was really lost. And finally Robert > > was kind enough to point me to Nina's "Abhidhamma in Daily Life". > > I was wondering, if it's possible and feasible, to add a link or a file, > > named "Beginner's Guide", where a list of links are given and > > possibly ordered by degree of difficulties for the study of > > Abhidhamma? 17017 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Nov 18, 2002 4:58am Subject: Re: [dsg] Selfishness/Jonothan Tom Thanks for these interesting points and observations. --- proctermail wrote: > Hello Jonothan ... > I qoute... > > As far as selfish motives are concerned, these are an inherent > aspect > > of our lives. Like it or not, the intrinsic nature of us all is > > 'unwholesome' and tending to become more so, ... > > are you implying that modern capitalist society seems breed > selfishness? this is something i believe and was made into a > seroius > argument by Weber in 'Protestant ethic and the spirit of > capitalism' I think what I was implying was that regardless of how well-meaning we may be (or how ideologically sound our thinking), selfishness is going to pervade almost everything we do. Recognising that this is how things are, and always have been (regardless of the political or social structure of the time), can be very beneficial in the long run because it allows us to face up to what I would describe as 'the real problem'. > i take your point about little animals that are inevitably going to > get caught unknowingly under our feet...i guess its more about > being aware. I was actually trying to suggest that what is most relevant and important in this area is knowing the difference between intentional action on the one hand and unintentional action (whether done with or without knowledge) on the other hand. Jon (keeping it short, too) 17018 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Mon Nov 18, 2002 5:06am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "what is awareness. James Thanks for writing. I've been following your many posts with interest. --- James wrote: > Jon, > > I feel that these are excellent observations, reflective of deep > insight. ... If only, if only ... > ... Therefore, humbly, I have a line of questioning(s) for you > (or others on-list) if you may consider it/them: What do you > relect > about the usefulness of koans in disrupting discursive thought to > reach pure awareness? Is there a significant difference between > discursive thought and pure awareness? If so, what is that > difference? Do you believe it is possible to disrupt discursive > thought, or simply to minimize it? Is either necessary for pure > awareness? Could the Abhidhamma be viewed as a method of turning > discursive thought into a vehicle for pure awareness (like > an 'Intellectual Koan') or is it pure awareness itself? Thank you > for considering my questions. To my understanding, awareness is a mental factor like any other mental factor (they come in both wholesome and unwholesome varieties). That is to say, it arises with a moment of consciousness and experiences the same object as the moment of consciousness. It may be a weak or strong, of short or long duration, depending on the conditioning factors. It will arise intermingled with other moments of consciousness, sometimes wholesome but mainly unwholesome. Awareness may have as its object any reality (dhamma). Discursive thinking, being one kind of reality, may be the object of awareness. For the person interested in developing awareness, discursive thinking is not something to be 'disrupted', but is simply another object that if presently arising is to be known as it truly is. I hope this is to the point of your questions (please say if it's not). Looking forward to following this along further. Jon 17019 From: James Date: Mon Nov 18, 2002 6:07am Subject: Re: Scrambled Egg-less 2 Hi James, I have a few comments I'd like to make on a few of your points from different posts, so this is going to be somewhat `scrambled'. (Hi Sarah, It was very interesting to see this post to say the least. Some of these topics go back kinda far. I'm surprised you didn't respond `in the heart of the battle'. Like Christine wrote in another post, some posts are easy to respond to and some posts require deep thought, study, and reflection time to respond to. I consider my posts to be more the former than the latter; but it is good to have both kinds I guess. I will just make a few quick comments about the sections: 1. internet rules & standards ==================== (Put simply, this forum is about thought, not about personality. The only thing I agree with about your assessment, and you really didn't raise this point but I was thinking this to be where we would be in agreement, bhikkhu's should follow a higher standard of morals than lay people and if there is ever any doubt, they should always take the high road. However, I didn't want to state that in my earlier post because I can see how valuable this group can be to bhikkhus, especially those in isolation. So I wanted to `cut them some slack', since it is a grey area. If you wanted to rejoin the group as an anonymous person, I don't see a problem with that; but maybe for a bhikkhu to do that it would be a little questionable. If Kom doesn't want to joke, that is his right. I know that the Buddha did joke, however, and appreciated a 'lightness' and joy in approaching life and the dharma. Everyone has their own personality.) 2. Vinaya corner =========== You suggest the rules are `for the proper and smooth functioning of the Sangha, not as omnipresent, moral guidelines.' (I was referring to the rules for bhikkhu's, not the first five precepts. I see the first five as moral rules and the remainder as training rules. I believe the remaining rules are not `moral' rules: sleeping in high beds, wearing makeup, carrying an umbrella on the street, etc. They are special rules for monks and not intrinsically `moral'. If they were intrinsically moral, then we all should follow them. Since we don't, I would guess that would make daily life very unmoral for the layperson by your definition of the morality of the training rules. I believe the morality comes in the fact that the monk has made a vow to follow the rules to the letter of the law. If the monk doesn't, then that becomes a breach of morality.) ***** 3 Testing Abhidhamma ================= You suggest that (the abhidhamma) "From untestable, undescribed observation, it then reaches a hypothesis of the nature of ultimate and conventional reality. It doesn't invite others to test this theory because it doesn't give the method by which it was reached." Nothing could be further from how I read and understand the abhidhamma which is described in detail and to be tested out at this very moment. (Quick reply—I was speaking only of Rupa, not Nama. Nama can be known through meditation, but how can the nature of matter outside of the body, when not observed directly, be known through meditation? But this is a dead issue now. I understand that the Abhidhamma is not approaching the subject of `rupa' like that. Frankly, it doesn't care about scientific proof. As Rob M and others explained. Sorry to drag you through my growing pains, but I am sure there are some lurkers who have the same questions but are afraid to ask/comment.) 4.Rupas ====== I'm not sure if you see rupas as `in' or `out' at the moment. (I see rupas as `in'. I think I understand how they fit within the abhidhamma's methodology. I don't know if this particular method fits my personality or style, but I will continue to lurk, read, and decide. I am not going to comment much more on that subject until I understand it first-hand for myself. And if I disagree, I won't comment at all. There won't be a need to `disprove' a philosophy. 5. Effective dialogues =============== You gave many helpful pointers (inc. those for the `facilitators) which I appreciated. I don't agree (I'm avoiding that word `question' which sounded too polite to you;-))that the Buddha didn't speak much about `how to conduct effective dialogues...' However, I believe the entire Teachings could be said to be about effective dialogue. (I agree ultimately, but not conventionally. I don't know of a sutta where he spelled it out in black-and-white. He didn't encourage his monks to dialogue with each other…actually he praised them the most when they didn't talk at all.) 6. DSG standards ============= LOL! Your comments were funny. And the other post I read about `don't ask James about the Abhidhamma' made me laugh too. Maybe I need a special `Don't Ask, Don't Tell' policy in regards to the Abhidhamma! :-) Thank you for all the helpful topics and comments. (You're very welcome.) Metta, James ps. Thanks for not putting my name in the subject heading. "Scambled Egg-less for James" would have made me hungry, and I'm on a diet! :-) 17020 From: James Date: Mon Nov 18, 2002 8:27am Subject: [dsg] Re: "what is awareness. --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Jonothan Abbott wrote: > James > > Thanks for writing. I've been following your many posts with > interest. (Thank you. It makes me smile when you write 'many posts'. Yes, I do write a lot of posts because they are like 'thinking outloud' to me. Since I think a lot, I write a lot. That is why this subject of discursive thought and awareness really interests me at the present. ) > > To my understanding, awareness is a mental factor like any other > mental factor (they come in both wholesome and unwholesome > varieties). That is to say, it arises with a moment of consciousness > and experiences the same object as the moment of consciousness. It > may be a weak or strong, of short or long duration, depending on the > conditioning factors. It will arise intermingled with other moments > of consciousness, sometimes wholesome but mainly unwholesome. (It was my understanding, which is probably incorrect, that discursive thinking will 'corrupt' awareness and make it unwholesome. Perhaps that is from too much Zen, Beginner's mind reading. Taming the monkey mind and what-not. What do you mean by wholesome and unwholesome? The Buddha used those terms to mean different things in different situations...at least by translation. Those words really lack the depth of meaning they should probably have...do you think?. They make me think that thoughts, mental objects, and mental states are either 'chaste' or 'naughty' :-) > > Awareness may have as its object any reality (dhamma). Discursive > thinking, being one kind of reality, may be the object of awareness. > For the person interested in developing awareness, discursive > thinking is not something to be 'disrupted', but is simply another > object that if presently arising is to be known as it truly is. (Wow. This is probably the first time I have seen this position about discursive thought and awareness. I have felt it was probably true, but thougt that to make discursive thought the subject of awareness was much like 'playing with fire.' What do you think? And how are you able to do this without the discrusive thought interrupting awareness of discursive thought? I know this is a tough question. Sorry for the efforts on your part to explain to me, but I do appreciate it.) > > I hope this is to the point of your questions (please say if it's > not). Looking forward to following this along further. > (Good, because you have raised probably more questions, at least in my mind, with your answers. But we can stop at any point if you like or feel I am not ready/able to understand at this point in my practice.) Metta, james 17021 From: Date: Mon Nov 18, 2002 4:18am Subject: To Jon: Question About "Accumulations" Hi, Jon (and all) - I found the following post of yours in the Useful Posts section of the DSG Files, under "Accumulations": ************************************* From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Tue Oct 10, 2000 1:20 pm Subject: Re: [DhammaStudyGroup] meditation, hatred ,and fear Mike > By the way, I've noticed that the term > 'accumulations' is often used in the group's > correspondence. Does this refer to vipaka? > Sankhaara? Both? Neither? Yes, there are some terms we have been using for so long that we forget they are not standard use! Thanks for raising this. "Accumulations" as I used it refers to those various tendencies we all have that make up the distinct personality and character by which we are conventionally known. For example, our preferences for particular tastes or colours, our good and bad qualities, the way we walk and talk and so on. Being easily angered or being interested in the dhamma would be other examples. They are called accumulations because, of course, they have been accumulated during the past. The defilements (kilesas) are those akusala inclinations we have accumulated. They come in different strengths, the subtle ones being the latent tendencies referred to in Kom’s post. Actually, since every citta is conditioned (in among other ways) by the citta which immediately precedes it, each citta contains the sum of all previous cittas. So in fact there is much more that is accumulated than the tendencies I have referred to. I hope this makes sense. Jonothan ******************************************** The notion of accumulations is an intuitively understandable one. Yet I am unclear as to specifics. From the Abhidhammic perspective, any mind-moment consists solely of an act of citta/vi~n~nana/discernment together with associated cetasikas, all involved with the same object of experience. For the accumulations to be found, they must lie among the cetasikas. Exactly where? The most likely would be, it seems to me, cetana. However, during a single mind-moment, can there be multiple cetanas operative? If not, how is the near-infinite collection of accumulations, existing and to be "passed on", accounted for? (Of course, nothing is passed on - currently occurring conditions are merely conditions for the arising of subsequent conditions.) With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17022 From: James Date: Mon Nov 18, 2002 9:29am Subject: Re: Scrambled Egg-less-PS Sarah, A Post Script to my message: You state in your post that the Buddha composed the Abhidhamma and he would, being enlightened, know the nature of rupa not directly observed. I cannot say that with such confidence. I do not presume to know the mind of a Buddha and have no idea if enlightenment is like omniscience. The Buddha simply said he was awake, he didn't say he was 'all knowing'. What do you think? Metta, James 17023 From: James Date: Mon Nov 18, 2002 9:29am Subject: Re: Scrambled Egg-less-PS Sarah, A Post Script to my message: You state in your post that the Buddha composed the Abhidhamma and he would, being enlightened, know the nature of rupa not directly observed. I cannot say that with such confidence. I do not presume to know the mind of a Buddha and have no idea if enlightenment is like omniscience. The Buddha simply said he was awake, he didn't say he was 'all knowing'. What do you think? Metta, James 17024 From: Uan Chih Liu Date: Mon Nov 18, 2002 11:18am Subject: Re: [dsg] Getting into Abhidhamma Hi Christine and Sarah, Thank you for your posts. They are indeed very helpful to me. I will take my time read through them and check through the links, and who knows, I may one day come back to construct a page of my own: "Abhidhamma for Dummies". with metta, Wendy ----- Original Message ----- From: "christine_forsyth" Sent: Monday, November 18, 2002 2:16 AM Subject: Re: [dsg] Getting into Abhidhamma > Hi Wendy, and all, > > I hope you may find the short articles helpful to give you 'bite- > sized' perspectives on the Abhidhamma. All of them helped me in some > way to understand just a little, and it proved enough to give me the > courage and patience to tackle longer texts. I found any questions > could be confidently put to the dsg members, no question is too > simple. > > I have also included links to some of the books, texts, and websites > related to Abhidhamma. > Personally, I'd read the articles first. Then your own interest will > take you anywhere and everywhere. :) (I hope the links all work.) > > metta, > Christine > > Article: Abhidhamma and Practice > http://www.abhidhamma.org/abhidhamma_and_practice.htm > Article: Be here now > http://www.abhidhamma.org/be%20here%20now.htm > Article: 'Abhidhamma Notes' > http://www.dhammastudy.com/Introduction.html > Article: Understanding Reality > http://www.abhidhamma.org/understanding%20reality.html > Article: 'Some Introductory Notes on Abhidhamma' > http://www.baynet.net/~arcc/dhamma/abhi1.html > The Abhidhamma Philosophy (about nine pages) > http://www.buddhanet.net/abhidh01.htm > Fourteen essays by members of a group of lay people who studied the > Abhidhamma > http://www.samatha.demon.co.uk/publications/abhidhammapapers/ > Article: Abhidhamma and Vipassana > http://www.abhidhamma.org/sitagu%20sayadaw.htm > > > e-books online: > http://www.vipassana.info/contents-vipassana.htm > e-Books in multiple formats on-line: > http://www.zolag.co.uk/ > Articles and books graded as to level of difficulty: > http://www.dhammastudy.com/engindex.html > > And anytime is a good time for wandering around in the dsg 'Useful > Posts'. > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Useful_Posts > > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Sarah wrote: > > Hi Wendy, > > > > --- Uan Chih Liu wrote: > Hi all, > > > When I join this group, frankly I was really lost. And finally > Robert > > > was kind enough to point me to Nina's "Abhidhamma in Daily Life". > > > I was wondering, if it's possible and feasible, to add a link or > a file, > > > named "Beginner's Guide", where a list of links are given and > > > possibly ordered by degree of difficulties for the study of > > > Abhidhamma? > 17025 From: Date: Mon Nov 18, 2002 5:09pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Proximate Cause of Unpleasant Mental Feeling Hi Sarah and Rob, Sarah thanks for explaining about the cotton and the hammer; I think I get it, sort of. Maybe the reason 'heart base' isn't given as proximate cause for pleasant mental feeling and neutral feeling is because it isn't proximate in the way it is for unpleasant mental feeling. One peculiar thought that occurred to me is that it almost seems like the absence of pleasant mental feeling causes pleasant mental feeling, baring interference by unpleasant mental feeling. Consciousness without happiness causes neutral feeing; neutral feeling is almost the same as tranquility; tranquility causes pleasant mental feeling. Therefor consciousness without happiness causes happiness. Larry 17026 From: rjkjp1 Date: Mon Nov 18, 2002 6:28pm Subject: Abhidhamma1 " Dear group. A letter I wrote a while ago "stvrn" wrote: > > In Theravadhee Sri Lankan Pali "Dhamma Sangini" and Vibhanga goes into > various unnecessary analysis. When reading these Abhidharma books one > do not get the same serene joy reading suttas. Initial simple suttas, > preached by Lord Buddha, was unnecessarily anlyzed and its original > broad meaning was blurred. >___________________ Dear stvrn, It may be that some or many people do not get serene joy from considering the Abhidhamma - but certainly some do, and I can attest to that. The Bhikkhus and Bhikkhunis of ancient times also did: The Atthasalini(Pali text Society)translation by Pe Maung Tin of Burma: ""The bhikkhus who study the Abhidhamma experience infinite rapturous joy in reflecting: As though grouping the mutitude of stars in the sky (into consteallations) the Teacher taught things mental and material dividing them into various parts and portions - things subtle and abstruse such as the unique conetnt of aggreagates (khandhas) sense-organs (ayatanas) elements(dhatus) , controlling factors, powers factors of wisdom, kamma and its result; and the distinction between mind and matter.""(p14) There is more about the joy that comes through considering the profound insights explained in the Abhidhamma and how it can lead to arahantship. In the Intro. to the Vibhanga(Abhidhamma pitaka)(Pali text society) Iggelden writes "It is all very well to say 'I know what needs to be done to break the continuity of rebirth and death'. In fact very few people know of even the most elementary reasons for the continuity of process, let alone of breaking it. It is the detailed description, analysis and reasons given for this cyclic process that the scriptures spend so much care in putting before us. It is all very well to say 'What do I want to know all these definitions of terms for, it only clutters the mind?'The question is, though, how many people when they seriously ask themselves as to the extent and range of some such apparently simple terms as greed, hatred and ignorance, can know their full and proper implications and manifestations within their own thoughts and actions..This the scriptures are at pains to make clear to even the dullest reader.."Endquote. He goes on in a similar vein for pages. It is natural that some people see the benefits of Abhidhamma and others don't. All of us have accumulated vastly different experiences during our very long stay in samsara vatta (the round of births and deaths) - we have different tastes, opinions and practices because of this. I hope you have the opportunity to investigate more the wisdom in the Abhidhamma and the rest of the Tipitaka. I find it all helpful; the vinaya, the suttas, the Jatakas, the Dhammapada; everything was taught for our benefit and handed on faithfully by the order of bhikkhus and bhikkhuni over these last millenia. How wonderful the Sangha, the Buddha and the Dhamma. Robert --- End forwarded message --- 17027 From: rjkjp1 Date: Mon Nov 18, 2002 6:37pm Subject: Abhidhamma3 Dear Group, Some quotes from the Sutta Pitaka and Vinaya: The Abhidhamma in the Vinaya. (Vin, 1V,344): "If without any intention of reviling the Vinaya one were to instigate another, saying, Pray study the Suttas or Gathas or Abhidhamma first and afterwards you will learn the Vinaya - there is no offence in him," In the Bhikkhuni Vibhanga Vin,1V,344( "Abhikkhuni is guilty of a minor offence) if she questions on the Abhidhamma or Vinaya after getting permission (to question) on the Suttanta, or on the Suttanta or Vinaya after getting permission (to question) on the Abhidhamma, or on the suttanta or Abhidhamma after getting permission (to question) on the Vinaya."...... Sanghadisesa VII, in the Book of Discipline, PTS, translated by I.B. Horner: "Then the venerable Dabba, the Mallian, being so chosen, assigned one lodging in the same place for those monks who belonged to the same company. For those monks who knew the Suttantas he assigned a lodging in the same place, saying: "These will be able to chant over the Suttantas to one another." For those monks versed in the Vinaya rules, he assigned a lodging in the same place, saying: "They will decide upon the Vinaya with one another." For those monks teaching dhamma he assigned a lodging in the same place, saying: "They will discuss dhamma[ in the actual Pali this is specified as ABHIDHAMMA] with one another." Sutta: The Mahagosinga sutta (MN 1, 218) Mahamoggalana said `Brother Sariputta, in the religion the talk of two bhikkhus on the ABHIDHAMMA, each asking and answering the other without faltering, is in accord with the Dhamma. Now such a bhikkhu, brother Sariputta, might enhance the beauty of the Gosinga Sala Forest. "" There are other references to the Abhidhamma in the sutta pitaka too: Petavatthu: "at that time the Buddha the exalted one was residing on the Pandukambala stone at the foot of the great coral tree in tavimtimsa (deva world) [expounding the abhidhamma] At that time devas and brahmas of the 10,00 fold universe held a meeting and approached the buddha. Buddhavamsa(about past buddha's): 1. Dipankara Buddha: "at the time when dipankara Buddha expounded the Dhamma in the tavitimsa world 90,000 crores of devas and brhamas realised the four noble truths..." It repeats for sevral other buddhas. Also the Abhidhamma pitaka can be called different names: In the Atthasalini it says "Thus as rehearsed at the (first)council, the Abhidhamma is Pitaka by Pitaka classification, Khuddaka-Nikaya by Nikaya classification, Veyyakarana by part classification and constitutes two or three thousand untis of text by the classification of textual units" . Sometimes you will read suttas where the Buddha refers to those bhikkhus who are skilled in the veyyakarana - and this may refer to the Abhidhamma. In the end I think historical studies can't satisfy us. We have to look at the Abhidhamma in depth to understand why it has been held up as the word of the Buddha, to see why it must have been the province of omnniscient wisdom. The Abhidhamma was taught by the Buddha to his mother and a myriad of other devas in the Tavitimsa deva world, it was not something to be revealed later. While he was teaching in the Deva world he also - by means of a created double - taught Sariputta (a human). Sariputta then taught his 500 students who all became arahant upon completion. It was not kept only for later times and was very much a part of the Dhamma while the Buddha was alive. From the atthasalini: "The textual order of the Abhidhamma originated with Sariputta; the numerical series in the Great Book was also determined by him. In this way the elder, without spoiling the unique doctrine, laid down the numerical series in order to make it easy to learn, remember, study and teach the Law. Such being the case, was the elder the very first to understand the Abhidhamma? Nay, it was the supreme Buddha who first understood the Abhidhamma...." It is very natural that many doubt the Abhidhamma. Even less than 300 hundred years after the Buddha died there was a sect called the Sautrantikas who believed only the Sutta and vinya were the original word of the Buddha. They said that there was no Tipitaka but only a Dvipitaka. (ti means three and dvi two). By the nature of the sasana the respect with which the Abhidhamma is held (and the understanding of it) will continue to diminish the further away from the parinibbana of the Buddha. Until finally the last section of the Abhidhamma, the Patthana will disapear and be heard no more until the next Buddha sasana. For now it is still available and I believe it well rewards those who contemplate it. We read in the Atthasalini how when the Buddha first contemplated the Patthana in the seventh week after his attainment of supreme enlightenment: "Rays of six colours -indigo, golden, red, white, tawny, and dazzling - issued from the Teacher's body, as he was contemplating the subtle and abstruse Law by his omniscience which had found such opportunity" when he "began to contemplate the twenty- four universal causal relations of condition, of presentation, and so on....". Robert 17028 From: rjkjp1 Date: Mon Nov 18, 2002 6:40pm Subject: Abhidhamma2 --- Dear Jerry, I think the Abhidhamma should not be seen as different from any other aspect of the Dhamma. Some people will study it and cling to the words it is true. But I think it unlikely that its study leads to self view as the whole Abhidhama has only one flavour : that of anatta. What is more dangerous is that - like any rigorous subject -- those who gain some proficiency, no matter how superficial, may fall prey to conceit. Still if there is genuine investigation of the present moment, based on what is said in the Abhidhamma and the rest of the Tipitaka, then conceit should(but no guarantee) become more apparent - and thus gradually its ugly nature discerned. The Book of Analysis (Vibhanga,Ch 17, 832) gives a list of the objects on account of which pride and conceit can arise: "Pride of birth; pride of clan; pride of health; pride of youth; pride of life; pride of gain; pride of being honoured; pride of being respected; pride of prominence; pride of having adherents; pride of wealth; pride of appearance; pride of erudition; pride of intelligence; pride of being a knowledgeable authority; pride of being (a regular) alms collector; accomplishment; pride of popularity; pride of being moral; pride of jhana; pride of dexterity; pride of being tall; pride of (bodily) proportion; pride of form; pride of (bodily) perfection..." 'end quote Earlier today I quoted a sutta "In the same manner consciousness on account is eye and forms is eye consciousness. Consciousness on account of ear and sounds is ear consciousness." These dhammas need to be known. And visible object is arising now, as is the consciousness that experiences it- the only question is whether there is any direct insight into its actual nature or not. Is there sati or is there neglect. Or is there some sort of imitation sati that knows something about the characteristic of seeing but with the subtle idea that "I" made the sati arise? Only we ourselves can know and even then we may fool ourselves or overstimate our understanding. According to Sammohavinodani (commentary to Vibhanga Abhidhamma)p. 147 there are 60,000 methods by which the eighfold path can be penetrated. We have to find out for ourself what helps, what leads towards self-effacement . It's bound to be intellectual and unclear in the beginning, but perhaps gradually a little more understanding grows that is a little more refined and understands a more precisely for an instant only. In between there is thinking (not necessarily in words) and wondering and doubting, but these are all realities which are explained in the Abhidhamma and which should be known too. Then we may just get lost in the world of concepts and that's so normal I think- and conditioned to be that way. Metta Robert 17029 From: kenhowardau Date: Mon Nov 18, 2002 8:50pm Subject: [dsg] Re: "what is awareness. Hi James, You wrote to Jon: > Yes, I do write a lot of posts because they are like 'thinking outloud' to me. Since I think a lot, I write a lot. > And you wrote to Sarah: > Sorry to drag you through my growing pains, but I am sure there are some lurkers who have the same questions but are afraid to ask/comment.) > That's certainly true in my case, and if I don't share all your questions, I still learn from them and the replies. Unlike you, I have trouble writing (even though I think a lot). When I do write, I find it easier to offer answers than to ask questions. So, for the benefit of us lurkers, please continue the way you're going, with your mix of questions and answers. Sarah wrote; >> However, I believe the entire Teachings could be said to be about effective dialogue," >> to which you replied: > I agree ultimately, but not conventionally. I don't know of a sutta where he spelled it out in black-and-white. > Several months ago, a dsg member (I forget who), quoted a sutta which seemed to spell it out in black and white. It involved a group of novice monks who had been isolated for the duration of the rains retreat. (I suppose the relevance of this is that they didn't have a senior monk to instruct them). The Buddha asked them what they had done during that time and they replied that, on their own initiative, they had kept `noble silence.' He rebuked them, saying they had wasted a valuable opportunity for discussing the Dhamma. Kind regards, Ken H --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "James" wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Jonothan Abbott > wrote: > > James > > > > Thanks for writing. I've been following your many posts with > > interest. > (Thank you. It makes me smile when you write 'many posts'. > 17030 From: Sarah Date: Mon Nov 18, 2002 11:16pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "what is awareness. Hi James & Ken H, --- kenhowardau wrote: > > That's certainly true in my case, and if I don't share > all your questions, I still learn from them and the > replies. Unlike you, I have trouble writing (even though > I think a lot). When I do write, I find it easier to > offer answers than to ask questions. So, for the benefit > of us lurkers, please continue the way you're going, with > your mix of questions and answers. ..... ....there you go James - a green flag from the lurkers represented by Ken H;-) Actually, you do us all a BIG favour if you can find the key to unlock Ken’s draft folder and encourage him to talk more. He has many pearls of wisdom to share and I’m not joking here (for once). ..... > Several months ago, a dsg member (I forget who), quoted a > sutta which seemed to spell it out in black and white. > It involved a group of novice monks who had been isolated > for the duration of the rains retreat. ..... Thanks very much for this prompt. There may have been another more recent post about this, but I think you (James) will find these 2 of interest on this topic (it also relates nicely to our vinaya corner): From U.P. “Silence” 6445, 6572 Hope to hear you both talking together...... thanks Ken H for the suggestion. Sarah ===== 17031 From: James Date: Mon Nov 18, 2002 11:26pm Subject: [dsg] Re: "what is awareness. Dear `Lurker' (AKA Ken H.) J: Thank you for the letter. I am glad that you appreciate the questions I raise in my posts. I know that many people are hesitant to `go out on a limb', especially in a public setting, and there is really nothing wrong with that. All a matter of `affluents' (not to be confused with `affluence' J. I have always felt that meaningful dialogue is important to discovering the practicality of the dharma. As I wrote in my introduction to this group, "My outlook is pretty unique; I like to think about Buddhism in modern terms and how it applies to daily life; and I have been known to be a little shocking to inspire thought…" So everyone should see, I gave ample warning! But I also wrote in that introduction, "I know a lot about Buddhism but I have a lot to learn about life. I hope that this group will welcome me so that I may learn." I am not in this group to offer too many answers (except to children…who need them); I mainly offer questions. But you see, I don't think I need to offer any answers because when it comes to dharma we all have the answers within us…it just takes some `shocking' questions to bring it out. I am eager to read and know that sutta you refer to. If it was posted in this group, surely someone knows about it. I cannot do much at my end, but if you or someone else could find it, I think it would benefit us all to re-examine it. I know that it would benefit me. Metta, James PS. I composed this in Word and then saw Sarah's post. I knew she would come to the rescue. I am going to keep it as it is to reflect what I was thinking at the time. But, Ken H., if you are holding out on us all of your 'pearls of wisdom', I am not too 'well for that.' Seems those CLAMS always have the best loot! :-) Please help where you can. 17032 From: Sarah Date: Mon Nov 18, 2002 11:59pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Getting into Abhidhamma Dear Wendy & Christine,then James (& vinaya corner), --- Uan Chih Liu wrote: >.... I may one day come back to construct a > page of my own: "Abhidhamma for Dummies". ..... That would be great;-) Meanwhile, Chris, you are a marvel....as James put far more politely, some of us are still in snailmail or even seamail mode whilst others like yourself are exemplary example's of internet efficiency. Many thanks. (Now if that wasn't too demanding - I mean it came back so fast even though you're testing out the hell realms at work - then perhaps, just perhaps, you might consider doing the same for other topics in the U.P. while all the reading is fresh in your mind). Hmmm....talking about right communication, I'd better stop before this slips further into unwise speech;-( ***** Here are a few relevant reminders from the Vinaya for daily life (I’m quoting from the Sammohavinodani for now, sect 17): 1.“Unnahanaa (persuading) is going on tying (people) up thus: ‘Lay followers, formerly you ued to give first-fruit alms at such a time; why do you not do so now?’ until they say: ‘We shall give, venerable sir, we have had no opportunity’ and so on; “entangling” (ve.thanaa) is what is meant........” 2. “Ukkaacanaa (suggesting) is insinuating (kaacanaa) and sugesting by specifying thus: “That family alone understands me; if there is anything to be given there, they give it to me only;’ “pointing out” is what is meant........” 3. “Anuppiyabha.nitaa (“ingratiating chatter”) is endearing chatter repeated again and again without regard to whether it is in conformity with truth and dhamma.” 4. “Caatukamyataa (“flattery”) is speaking in a humble manner, always maintaining an attitude of inferiority.” 5. “Muggasuupyataa (“bean-soupery”) is a resemblance to bean soup. for just as when beans are being cooked only a few do not get cooked, the rest get cooked; so the person in whose speech only a little is true, the rest being false, is called “bean soup”; his state is “bean-soupery”." ***** James, I agreed with your apt comments about the rules and morality. Your points are well-taken and we shouldn’t try to imitate the monk’s life or set of rules. However, I think that by reflecting on the rules, the reasons for the rules and the meaning behind many of them, such as in these examples, we can learn more about sila in daily life and about our various mental states. Even ones like the rule you quoted about not speaking to someone holding an umbrella etc which seems quite irrelevant, can be helpful if we consider the purpose: there’s no use talking about dhamma to someone who is not interested to hear or at an inappropriate time. Thanks for your other comments too - maybe more by sea-mail later;-) Sarah ===== 17033 From: ven.yanatharo.bikkhu Date: Mon Nov 18, 2002 11:57pm Subject: On my way. Dear Friends, Tomorrow very early I start my journey to North Carolina. This morning I broke my small toe in my right foot. So you are getting a very sore and limping monk. See you in the evening. Ven. Yanatharo 17034 From: Sarah Date: Tue Nov 19, 2002 5:06am Subject: Re: [dsg] Proximate Cause of Unpleasant Mental Feeling Dear Rob M & Larry, Actually, reviewing these references I gave before and then checking a few more afterwards, I’m not sure how rigidly we should view poximate causes and there may be variants in different contexts perhaps. What do you think? From my post a little while back: ***** "Immediate occasion (pada.t.thaana.m) means proximate cause. Thus wherever we speak of characteristics, etc, their mutual difference should be understood in this wise." Atthasalini transl PTS p84 ..... As I understand pada.t.thaana literally means 'footprint' from pada-foot. Now I understand better the use of 'footing' in the PTS Netti transl which you also have. 'footing' is translated from pada.t.thaana as in: " 'Investigate yourselves, launch out' are the footing for energy. (The words) 'Devote yourselves in the Enlightened One's Dispensation' are the footing for concentration. (The words) 'Scatter the armies of Mortality as does an elephant a hut of reeds' are the footing for understanding...."(Netti, 40 p65 in transl) ..... Also under the "Mode of conveying Footings"(Netti, 104 p140 in transl): " 'So let his cognizance be guarded': this is the footing for the three kinds of good conduct. 'Having for pasture right intention': this is the footing for quiet. 'Giving right view first place': this is the footing for insight. 'Through knowing rise and fall: this is the footing for the plane of seeing (as the path of Stream Entry). 'Transcending drowsing and lethargy a bhikkhu may': this is the footing for energy. 'Abandon all bad destinations': this is the footing for keeping in being (as the attainment of the three higher paths)." ***** new === Sammohavinodani (commentary to Vibhanga) examples: cruelty(vihimsa)- prox. cause: annoyance feeling (pleasure and pain)-prox.cause: contact (as in dep. orignination) enjoyment - prox.cause: desirable object also Netthi example: feeling - prox cause: contact (as above) (Btw, the Netthippakara.na is transl by B.Nanamoli as The Guide (PTS)and was written 2000 yrs ago as a guide for commentators. “It deals with scaffolding, not with architecture”(intro) and ‘tradition places the Guide as a product of the First council’.The intro on the history and authorship is very long & detailed) ***** Sarah ====== 17035 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Nov 19, 2002 10:03am Subject: meditation subjects, vipaka, heartbase. Dear Sarah and all, The four meditation subjects on all occasions were only in the Tika, that is why Ven. Soma did not translate them. They are very fitting: At any time there can be recollection of the Buddha, since he taught about realities now. Metta: we are so often with other people, and it helps most of all to see them as conditioned nama and rupa. Prevents irritation and distress about unpleasant behaviour and also attachment. Mindfulness of Death: especially in the ultimate sense: birth and death at each moment, of nama and rupa now. The foulness of the body: it can appear time and again in our own body or other's body, when eating, chewing, etc. Thank you for your kind words Sarah. I feel Larry thinking already of the next question: < the state of being not captivated by the unreal, and the state of not running away from the real -- these, when practiced produce yogic power; and the ability to practice these is yogic skill.> Larry may ask: what is in Pali? I shall look at it, later on. I made a note. And thank you, Larry, for all your work with the Way, and your enthusiasm in studying and asking questions. As we read in the Suttas, this and considering, investigating, is so essential for the development of understanding. You helped us all to consider what we read. Meanwhile I found: abhuuta.m apakkhipanto bhuuta~nca anapanento yogasamattho hotiiti : abhuuta.m, not real.apakkhipanto: not enclosing, inserting. Bhuuta`nca, and the real, anapanento, not removing... Is the skill of the meditator. Thus, he translated it freely with: not running away. As to bare mindfulness: I heard meditation teachers use it, that is why I asked for the Pali on the Pali list where they also discussed choiceless awareness. They may not have time to answer me. Rob M wrote some posts on kamma with questions and a whole list. I thought of it but had no time to asnwer then. I believe that we have to be very careful in making conclusions, kamma and vipaka is the field of Buddhas. Is kusala with somanassa higher than with upekkha? But when we consider understanding with upekkha is that not higher than giving with pleasure, for example? But, I think that we should not measure at all, it depends on conditions what kind of kusala will arise. I saw one remark in your post: it seemed someone believed that each akusala citta is akusala kamma, bringing a result. I did not keep the post, sorry if I misunderstood this. Such a belief will make people distressed. Reading the news paper with akusala citta or laughing is not akusala kamma in the sense of an evil deed. There is akusala cetana with each akusala citta, but it does not always have the intensity of motivating a bad deed. So many cittas rooted in moha arise time and again, these are not akusala kamma. They are impure, but you do not harm others. When we read the Vinaya, we can learn many details about akusala citta and akusala kamma. Monks were scrupulous and thought they had committed a heavy transgression, and the Buddha asked whether they had the intention to do this or that. You also mentioned that there is a belief that one can make up for akusala kamma by kusala citta. Again, how can we measure. It depends on conditions what type of citta arises and best of all: understand whatever arises. If we think of making up, it seems that we can control vipaka in future. The Buddha taught Dhamma to help people, not with the aim to make them scrupulous or distressed. This reminds me of the passages where the Buddha spoke about rebirth in hell planes. I think about people's worries about the last javana cittas before the dying-consciousness. When the Buddha spoke about hell planes he explained about cause and effect. It can remind us not to waste our time, letting opportunities for developing understanding go by. When we are afraid there is dosa, we miss such opportunities and that was not the Buddha's aim of teaching us cause and effect. When we worry we miss the point of his teaching. Unhappy feeling and the heartbase: Vis. XIV, 128: Its proximate cause is invariably the heart-base. In the arupa-Brahma planes there is no unhappy feeling and also no heartbase, there is no rupa. But, as we read, it always needs a physical base, the heartbase. Somanassa and upekkha can arise in those planes, they do not need a base in that case. We read in the Dispeller I, Aggregates, feeling, about the feelings which are with base, and also: those with base and without base. This will solve the question. When compared with somanassa and upekkha, domanassa invariably needs a base, the heartbase. As to proximate cause: I have to correct what I said before, that it is always at the same time as the dhamma which is involved: rupa is weak at its arising moment and cannot condition nama, it has to arise before. By the way, Sarah, I also have in the same nice edition Patimokkha, the rule for Buddhist Monks. Same edition as The Entrance to the Vinaya. It may be available in the Mahamakut bookshop, opposite Wat Bovornives, Soi Phra Sumera. Nina. 17036 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Nov 19, 2002 11:13am Subject: bare mindfulness Dear Larry, Rob Ed helped me to find the passage: >[Tika] "Arousing of Mindfulness". Here bare mindfulness is meant. >Therefore, the commentator speaks of "the things that make up the >condition connected with the Arousing of Mindfulness." These things are >energy and so forth, associated necessarily with mindfulness. Condition >[anga] = reason [karana].> Yasmaa satiyevettha satipa.t.thaana.m vuttaa, tasmaassa sampayuttaa dhammaa viiriyaadayo an.ganti aaha: "sampayogan.ga~ncassa dassetvaa" ti. An.ga-saddo cettha kaara.napariyaayo da.t.thabbo. Satiyevettha is: sati eva (ettha is: here), means: just mindfulness. No technical term. I shall continue later on. Nina. 17037 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Nov 19, 2002 11:13am Subject: Re: [dsg] Proximate Cause of Unpleasant Mental Feeling Dear Sarah, I like your post on the Netti and now understand footing. I looked it up. op 19-11-2002 14:06 schreef Sarah op sarahdhhk@y...: > ***** > "Immediate occasion (pada.t.thaana.m) means proximate cause. Thus > wherever we speak of characteristics, etc, their mutual difference should > be understood in this wise." Atthasalini transl PTS p84 > ..... > As I understand pada.t.thaana literally means 'footprint' from pada-foot. > > Now I understand better the use of 'footing' in the PTS Netti transl which > you also have. 'footing' is translated from pada.t.thaana as in: 17038 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Nov 19, 2002 11:13am Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma1 Dear Rob K, I like your series on Abh, I never have enough of this subject. Very helpful. Nina. op 19-11-2002 03:28 schreef rjkjp1 op rjkjp1@y...: > > It may be that some or many people do not get serene joy from > considering the Abhidhamma - but certainly some do, and I can attest > to that. The Bhikkhus and Bhikkhunis of ancient times also did: 17039 From: Date: Tue Nov 19, 2002 4:10pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Pali: sati sampajanna Hi Nina, I thought you left already. I have several comments on Way 24 that I was going to save until you got back. Should we discuss now? Larry 17040 From: Date: Tue Nov 19, 2002 4:22pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Proximate Cause of Unpleasant Mental Feeling Hi Sarah, What"s the difference between pada.t.thaana.m (proximate cause) and anantarapaccaya (proximity condition). Does anantarapaccaya relate only to 'mental states'? (see guide 13 ch. VIII CMA) Larry 17041 From: Date: Tue Nov 19, 2002 4:58pm Subject: Re: [dsg] bare mindfulness Hi Nina and all, I wonder if satiyevettha (just mindfulness) is what Ven. U Narada had in mind for "bare attention". Maybe someone familiar with Burmese could track this down. Can you make a distinction between satiyevettha and sukkha-vipassana? Here is a snippet from "The Heart of Buddhist Meditation" by Nyanaponika Thera: Bare attention is the clear and single-minded awareness of what actually happens *to* us and *in* us, at the successive moments of perception. It is called 'bare', because it attends just to the bare facts of a perception as either through the five physical senses or through the mind which, for Buddhist thought, constitutes the sixth sense. When attending to that sixfold sense impression, attention or mindfulness is kept to a bare registering of the facts observed, without reacting to them by deed, speech or by mental comment which may be one of self-reference (like, dislike, etc), judgement or reflection. If during the time, short or long, given to the practice of Bare Attention, any such comments arise in one's mind, they themselves are made objects of Bare Attention, and are neither repudiated nor pursued, but are dismissed, after a brief mental note has been made of them. L: This seems rather rigid and formal to me. I wonder where insight comes in. I may well be wrong, but I think Khun Sujin's objection to this is that it doesn't address or recognize the mind behind the discipline and it separates 'practice mind' from 'ordinary mind'. Possibly it misses the flavour of the word "lives" (viharati) in "a bhikkhu lives contemplating the body in the body..." Any comments? Larry 17042 From: Robert Epstein Date: Tue Nov 19, 2002 7:43pm Subject: Re: [dsg] bare mindfulness Hi Larry, I am jumping in to what I see as a valuable topic. Please forgive my profuse comments after being absent for so long. I can only pop in when I'm able these days, but I'm glad to see that these interesting questions are still brewing here at dsg. And hello to everyone. Comments below. --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., LBIDD@w... wrote: > Hi Nina and all, > > I wonder if satiyevettha (just mindfulness) is what Ven. U Narada had in > mind for "bare attention". ... > Bare attention is the clear and single-minded awareness of what actually > happens *to* us and *in* us, at the successive moments of perception. It > is called 'bare', because it attends just to the bare facts of a > perception as either through the five physical senses or through the > mind which, for Buddhist thought, constitutes the sixth sense. When > attending to that sixfold sense impression, attention or mindfulness is > kept to a bare registering of the facts observed, without reacting to > them by deed, speech or by mental comment which may be one of > self-reference (like, dislike, etc), judgement or reflection. If during > the time, short or long, given to the practice of Bare Attention, any > such comments arise in one's mind, they themselves are made objects of > Bare Attention, and are neither repudiated nor pursued, but are > dismissed, after a brief mental note has been made of them. > > L: This seems rather rigid and formal to me. What do you think is there to be more informal about, aside from perception and the working of the mind? With respect, and with a sense of 'devil's advocate', it 'feels' like this mechanical model may offend your sense of 'self'. Is it possible that there is some further romance beyond the mechanism of the kandhas that you are looking to include by being less clinical? Why not be this rigid? I know for myself that I would like to think there is something warmer and more personal going on in this collection of responses known as 'Robert' [Robert Ep. around here], but isn't this exactly the insistence on a subtle level that there is a 'self' with its own reality, personality and poetic attributes? If one were to be 'less rigid' as you propose, what kind of mindfulness description would seem preferable to you? I wonder where insight > comes in. I think that the 'bare attention' formulation above implies that insight comes from complete attention to 'what is', with a surgical precision. I don't see any difference between such precision and the idea of 'discernment', which means to see things as they are and in no other way [in other words, without delusion or ignorance]. of I may well be wrong, but I think Khun Sujin's objection to > this is that it doesn't address or recognize the mind behind the > discipline The 'mind behind the discipline' that you are looking for is the same exact mind that is included in the description you are questioning. After all, he does say that we are to pay attention to what takes place 'within and without' and describes the mental component as the traditional 'sixth sense' in Buddhism. If we observe the mind as well as the sensory content but do not react to it, this does not mean that we control the mind's initial 'natural' response, but that we steadily observe it, whatever it is. What if we smell rotten food and the response is disgust and aversion? We don't try to control the 'disgust' reaction, but we try not to react to the 'disgust' by generating more concept and explanation, but observe the disgust and see it for what it is. This merely stops the infinite regress of the mind - reacting to reaction to reaction and allows a space of basic discernment. Some may still feel this is tampering with the natural reaction of the mind, but I would think there has to be some interference, at least of the intention to discern what is happening, in order for mindfulness attention and insight upon its heels to take place. and it separates 'practice mind' from 'ordinary mind'. This idea that one can have 'only ordinary mind' as a Buddhist practitioner has always seemed very problematic to me. I have never seen the possiblity of somehow pretending that we are really observing the mind in complete naturalness and that somehow this is desireable or necessary. It is like walking on eggshells not to reveal ourselves to someone who already knows we're in the room. Once you are a Buddhist your observation of your 'natural mind' is as natural as a television interview. In these disputes about observing everyday mind vs. meditation with a specific object vs. the above 'natural attention', which lays out rules for observation, I would agree that each of them sets up a framework for a different 'skillful means' of coming to mindfulness and insight, but I will not agree that any of them are really truly natural, or could ever be. It would be fruitless to simply allow delusion to take its 'natural course' without any intervention to try to discern it, and it would be equally fruitless to try to force mindfulness or insight by desperately grasping at the ingredients of reality. If there is to be any success in the Buddhist endeavor to not only see reality but eventually to embody it with truth and wisdom, then one has to use skill, relaxation and insight and balance these ingredients according to one's level of advancement. Whatever framework one chooses to practice within, whether it be ordinary life-moments, concentrated or contemplative meditation, applied Dharma through Sutta study, or controlled non-reactive observation of the mind and senses, one must find the balance of ingredients that will lead to mindfulness, insight, wisdom and eventually enlightenment. These ingredients seem to include the practice of metta and sila, leading to kusala conditions, attention and mindfulness, discernment and insight, and enough samatha so that one can relax and allow the above to take place. All of these seem to be developed gradually by using all expedient means according to one's predisposition and what works for an individual. > Possibly it misses the flavour of the word "lives" (viharati) in "a > bhikkhu lives contemplating the body in the body..." Any comments? I think it is possible that the 'living' quality is often left out from a contemplation of the operation of the kandhas, but it is by no means a simple problem. Buddha himself seems to leave it out, and it is much more common that the practitioner will romanticize the operation of the kandhas by invoking this 'living quality' as an actual reality that operates independent of the kandhas, and what does this lead to? It is simply another reinstatement of the idea of a self, an entity, a being, or a person who really really does exist, once this messy business of the kandhas is cleared away. I know I tend to do this, and it is the trick of all of us to try to reinstate the ego through some warm and fuzzy form. That is why I think that the resistances and reactions that rise up around a 'cold' formulation that just makes the person a mechanical device to be observed are very very valuable to observe in their own right. Why do we care if the 'flavour of the word "lives" is left out'? It can only be because we still desparately want there to be a *someone* who lives and we don't want him snuffed out. The business of the 'self' is endlessly tricky. On the other hand, what if one is denying the 'self-factors' that arise in the mind by insisting on a 'non-reactive' observer, and by doing so suppress the sentient responses that indicate the desire for a self and its possessions? This kind of suppression will not lead to enlightenment because it will cover up the very material that needs to be discerned. So it seems to me that the observation of arising events in the senses and mind do need to be 'cold', but the *content* of the mind that is being observed needs to be 'open', allowing all the mushy and fuzzy content that pertains to the self-concept and self-feeling to come up and be discerned. The pitfalls of self-observation are many, but if we keep looking at the moment with a degree of calm and openness we should be able to get a sense of what is really happening, at least in accord with our current level of understanding, which is all we can ever have. Best, Robert Ep. 17043 From: James Date: Tue Nov 19, 2002 8:52pm Subject: The 12-Steps to Buddhahood- Pt. 1 Hey All, Just a post of some of my current thinking. "This body, Magandiya, is a disease, a cancer, an arrow, painful, an affliction. And yet you say, with reference to this body, which is a disease, a cancer, an arrow, painful, an affliction: 'This is that freedom from disease, master Gotama. This is that Unbinding,' for you don't have the noble vision with which you would know freedom from disease and see Unbinding."… Majjhima Nikaya 75, Magandiya Sutta (To Magandiya) The Buddha understood that we all suffer from a very serious disease, the disease of Desire/Clinging. And like Magandiya from the above passage, we often think that we can rid ourselves of this disease with the very thing that is causing it: ourselves. However, it isn't possible to rid disease with something that is diseased. Viewing desire as a `mental disease', which afflicts us all but there exists a cure; I have directed my thinking toward modern psychological disease treatments. The most successful and tested model of psychological disease treatment in our modern world is the 12-Step Program of Alcoholics Anonymous. This program, which emphases the `Anonymous' nature of all people with the disease of alcoholism, in my opinion, can provide a model of Buddhist outlook and a context for systematic practice in line with that intended by the Buddha. I thought I might share my analysis, thinking, with the members of this group. This analysis is not meant as a `prescription' for everyone, just a possible avenue for individual approach to our shared current state of disease. (Note: Term Substitutions for original steps: `Desire' for `Alcohol'; `The Triple Gem' for `God'; `Reflection' for `Prayer') STEP ONE: WE ADMIT WE ARE POWERLESS OVER DESIRE- THAT OUR LIVES HAVE BECOME UNMANAGEABLE. We admit that desire is something that is controlling us; we are not able to control desire. We, our egos, are the cause of this desire so we realize that `we' are powerless to stop it. Every attempt to do so through struggle, asserting power, control, dominance, etc. only increases the severity of the desire. We have the disease of desire and we are not going to be able to `cure' ourselves of it. We surrender the struggle for control and self-blame concerning this disease. We accept `our' powerlessness in this situation. Additionally, we admit that desire is making us behave and think in ways that are counterproductive to true happiness. In the past, we could see this and knew this, but we were powerless to stop it. Our lives, as they currently are, are harmful, unwholesome, and detrimental to others and ourselves because of desire. The first and most important step is to admit the existence and the nature of the disease of desire that we have and the reality of how it impacts our lives. STEP TWO: COME TO BELIEVE THAT A POWER GREATER THAN OURSELVES CAN RESTORE US TO SANITY. Presently, those who suffer the disease of desire do not believe that anything other than `the self' can rid `the self' of it. This makes the disease continue. It isn't until one `comes to believe' that a power greater than `the self' exists and can rid `the self' of desire, that true healing begins. This belief will be sincere and profound and often doesn't occur until the disease of desire has gotten so severe that the person realizes that `the self' will not be able to cure it. It is at this point that the possibility of hope for a cure becomes real and not just imagined. STEP THREE: MAKE A DECISION TO TURN OUR WILL AND OUR LIVES OVER TO THE TRIPLE GEM, AS WE UNDERSTAND IT. To `Take Refuge in The Triple Gem' doesn't mean simply having an intellectual understanding of it as if it is a philosophy. Taking Refuge means that we surrender ourselves-body, mind, and karma-to the power of The Triple Gem. We accept the higher power of the combined wisdom, compassion, and knowledge of The Buddha, The Dharma, and The Sangha to guide us and protect us. This means that we `turn our will' over to The Triple Gem. We consciously throw away what `we' as diseased individuals want and crave. We replace our selfish desires with sincere adherence to The Triple Gem. We also turn our lives over to The Triple Gem. Our diseased selves no longer determine what we do, and whom we associate with; our lives are determined by the wisdom of The Triple Gem. We make the decision that our `I' should no longer exist. Our `I' is diseased and there is a higher state of being to replace it. STEP FOUR: MAKE A SEARCHING AND FEARLESS MORAL INVENTORY OF OURSELVES. We determine just where desire manifests itself in `the self'. We all have lived for years in denial of our desire disease. People who have also lived in denial of their disease have surrounded us. Denial has become a way of life and support for our desire. Denial is stopped. We cast a light on the true nature of our diseased `selves' to begin the work of transformation. This requires `deep searching' and `fearlessness'. We are, naturally, going to have to search deep and long for the hidden features of the disease. The nature of any disease is to hide and survive at all costs. This makes it a formidable foe. But with `fearlessness', the reality of our faults comes more easily to the surface. Before we practice Sila, the first five precepts, we search out and admit to ourselves where we haven't followed them and where we still don't. This takes searing honesty and courage. To be continued…. (Since I tend to bombard with new ideas before old ones have been digested, I am going to go slower with these particular posts. I will cover four steps with each post, until there are three posts covering all twelve steps.) Metta, James 17044 From: Star Kid Date: Tue Nov 19, 2002 8:52pm Subject: Reply: Kom Dear Kom: Hi, I'm Philip. Thanks for writing to me. I have read your letter, and I agree with you that we cannot control over what will happen to us. I have a few questions I want to ask you. Even that I am a Christian, I am still interested in many other religions , such as Buddhism, Islam, Catholic, Hindu......Can you please tell me what is your religion, and tell me something about it? Thanks very much. Yours sincerely, Philip 17045 From: Star Kid Date: Tue Nov 19, 2002 8:59pm Subject: Buddhism question( please reply) Dear guys: I'm Philip Chui, and I think I have introduced myself in the last letter I sent to you guys already. I have some questions about Buddhism: 1. Who is the god in Buddhism? How many forms of the god does your religion have?( In Christianity, we have three: The father, the son and the holy spirit ). 2. What is the belief in Buddhism? 3. When you die, where do you go, according to your religion? 4. How do you prove that Buddha is real? Thanks a lot for reading my letters. If you have any questions about my religion ( Christianity ), do not hestitate to tell me. Yours sincerely, Philip Chui 17046 From: Date: Tue Nov 19, 2002 9:09pm Subject: Re: [dsg] bare mindfulness Hi Robert, Nice to see you again. Sorry, but I can't discuss this with you until you have read the commentary (and maybe some of our discussions) up to as far as we have studied. We have just touched on the first "covetousness and grief" in the sutta: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/misc/wayof.html best wishes, Larry 17047 From: ajahn_paul Date: Wed Nov 20, 2002 2:24am Subject: Re: Buddhism question( please reply) --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., Star Kid wrote: > Dear guys: > > I'm Philip Chui, and I think I have introduced myself > in the last letter I sent to you guys already. I have > some questions about Buddhism: > > 1. Who is the god in Buddhism? How many forms of the > god does your religion have?( In Christianity, we have > three: The father, the son and the holy spirit ). i dont think we have a God.... we dont beleive there is anyone that create anything. > 2. What is the belief in Buddhism? This/that conditionality. This name for the causal principle the Buddha discovered on the night of his Awakening stresses the point that, for the purposes of ending suffering and stress, the processes of causality can be understood entirely in terms of forces and conditions that are experienced in the realm of direct experience, with no need to refer to forces operating outside of that realm. > 3. When you die, where do you go, according to your > religion? depands on the karma > 4. How do you prove that Buddha is real? mmm..... do u have any strong evidence that can prove God is real? ^^ 17048 From: Sarah Date: Wed Nov 20, 2002 3:11am Subject: Re: [dsg] Proximate Cause of Unpleasant Mental Feeling Hi Larry, --- LBIDD@w... wrote: > Hi Sarah, > > What"s the difference between pada.t.thaana.m (proximate cause) and > anantarapaccaya (proximity condition). Does anantarapaccaya relate only > to 'mental states'? (see guide 13 ch. VIII CMA) ..... These are completely different terms even though the English translations make them sound similar and can cause confusion. As we have been discussing, padatthana (proximate cause/footing) can refer to a nama, a rupa, a group of namas or rupas or even some words (concepts) according to the Netthi. Anantara paccaya (proximity condition) and its twin, samanantara paccaya (contiguity condition) only apply to cittas and accompanying cetasikas. Anantara means ‘without interval’ and are the condition by which the preceding citta conditions the subsequent citta without a break. This is the way that mental states, knowlege and kamma are accumulated from moment to moment or citta to citta. I’ve just looked at the reference you’ve given which adds more detail. Nina’s book ‘Conditions’ gives more info too. http://www.zolag.co.uk/ Hope this clarifies. Sarah ====== 17049 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Nov 20, 2002 3:53am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "what is awareness. James --- James wrote: > ... <> Before we go too far, I suppose we should make sure we're talking about the same thing. What do you understand by the term 'discursive thought', and where do your references come from? <> (James, I'm sure there's nothing new for you in what follows, but I always try to state things as simply as I can.) The terms 'wholesome' and 'unwholesome' are the terms usually used for the Pali 'kusala' and 'akusala'. For most purposes, the moments of consciousness experienced during our waking hours can be divided into 2 kinds. The actual moments of experience through the various sense-doors are one kind. These include all the moments of seeing and hearing that go on seemingly continuously. They are moments of resultant consciousness (vipaka citta). For each moment of sense-door experience, however, there are many, many other moments of consciousness that 'process' or think about the moment of sense-door experience (otherwise nothing would 'make sense'), and there are also many, many moments of thinking not directly related to presently experienced sense-impressions. These other moments of consciousness are either kusala or akusala in nature (they cannot be 'neutral'). The nature of a moment of consciousness is determined by the mental factors that accompany that moment. Generosity, loving-kindness, patience are examples of kusala mental states. Aversion and attachment are examples of akusala mental states. So the terms do have a very specific meaning as used by the Buddha. <<(Wow. This is probably the first time I have seen this position about discursive thought and awareness. I have felt it was probably true, but thougt that to make discursive thought the subject of awareness was much like 'playing with fire.' What do you think? And how are you able to do this without the discrusive thought interrupting awareness of discursive thought? I know this is a tough question. Sorry for the efforts on your part to explain to me, but I do appreciate it.)>> To my understanding, it is not possible to 'make' anything the subject of awareness, nor is it the case that any one dhamma is a 'better' object of awareness than any other dhamma. <<(Good, because you have raised probably more questions, at least in my mind, with your answers. But we can stop at any point if you like or feel I am not ready/able to understand at this point in my practice.)>> I'm quite happy to keep going. I'm not known for my prompt responses, so I hope you don't mind either some delay or rather brief replies, or more likely, replies that are both slow and brief ;-)) Jon 17050 From: Jonothan Abbott Date: Wed Nov 20, 2002 3:55am Subject: Re: [dsg] To Jon: Question About "Accumulations" Howard I think your question is, Where do the latent tendencies hide when they are not manifesting? I don't know the answer to this ;-)). I don’t even know if the question is 'admissible' (I suspect not!). I haven't seen or heard this discussed anywhere, except for mention of the fact that the 'passing on' of previous experiences is possible because of the fully contiguous nature of succeeding moments of consciousness (i.e., 'no gap in between'). Other than that I can't be of any help, I'm afraid. Are you asking because you see it as something that needs to be known, or because you find it difficult to accept? Jon --- upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, Jon (and all) - > > I found the following post of yours in the Useful Posts > section of the > DSG Files, under "Accumulations": > ************************************* ... ... > ******************************************** > The notion of accumulations is an intuitively understandable > one. Yet > I am unclear as to specifics. From the Abhidhammic perspective, any > > mind-moment consists solely of an act of > citta/vi~n~nana/discernment together > with associated cetasikas, all involved with the same object of > experience. > For the accumulations to be found, they must lie among the > cetasikas. Exactly > where? The most likely would be, it seems to me, cetana. However, > during a > single mind-moment, can there be multiple cetanas operative? If > not, how is > the near-infinite collection of accumulations, existing and to be > "passed > on", accounted for? (Of course, nothing is passed on - currently > occurring > conditions are merely conditions for the arising of subsequent > conditions.) > > With metta, > Howard 17051 From: ajahn_paul Date: Wed Nov 20, 2002 5:10am Subject: How do you prove that Buddha is real Hi all, im not trying to do anything to prove that Buddha is real,, i just want to tell a short story!!!! Once upon a time, in a very beautiful ocean, fish mommy and fish daughter were playing in front of their house, and they started a little chat..... *** d=daughter, m=mommy *** d: mom, can i ask u a question? m: of cause honey! go ahead. d: i heard my friends said, fish lives in the sea. m: so??? d: so, where is the sea,, can u take me there and have a look? And now,, i guess we all know where is Buddha,, and also the Dhamma! ^____^ 17052 From: James Date: Wed Nov 20, 2002 5:45am Subject: Re: "what is awareness. Jon, By discursive thought, I mean analytical thinking, planning, deciding, etc., not sensory input processing or pure recollection. This definition I am using comes from common usage, not Buddhist scripture. I thought that that is what you meant by wholesome and unwholesome, but I was hoping for a more `nibbana based' and `non-nibbana based' type of definition. Often when you ask the simplest questions, that we all take for granted, the answers can be truly inspiring and lead in new directions. I have a hunch you have more insight to offer in this area, but you are a `tough nut to crack'. Simplicity is fantastic, but commonality is banal, at least to me. You write: To my understanding, it is not possible to 'make' anything the subject of awareness, nor is it the case that any one dhamma is a 'better' object of awareness than any other dhamma. This isn't my understanding, but I could be wrong. When the Buddha taught that we all must cultivate the Four Foundations of Mindfulness, I was assuming that this means we must be aware of reality in every moment by directing our attention to the four foundations. That does require `making' something the subject of awareness. What is it that usually gets in the way of doing that? My estimation is that discursive thought does. Discursive thought is most removed from reality and most subject to the whims of negative mind states, and positive mind states for that matter. I guess my questioning was leading to know how to use meta-cognition, thinking about thinking, as a foundation for mindfulness. But I see that I must learn more about how the Abhidhamma describes such processes. My thinking and terminology is based in my psychology, sociology, and learning theories education, and the Abhidhamma takes a different approach. We can continue this dialogue when I have established a better foundation in the vocabulary/approach commonly practiced in this forum. Metta, James 17053 From: James Date: Wed Nov 20, 2002 6:40am Subject: Re: Consciousness and the heart base --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "christine_forsyth" wrote: > Dear Group, > > I wonder if anyone has read "The Heart's Code: Tapping the Wisdom and > Power of Our Heart Energy: The New Findings About Cellular Memories > and Their Role in the Mind/Body/Spirit" by Paul Pearsall? > I haven't, but it seems possibly relevant to the post that TG made to > James. Christine, This post has fascinated me since you posted it. I have been reading about this particular book and its position ever since. I stayed up until 4:00 am in the morning the night you posted it! I was reading about the book, its author, and trying to get all of the information I could gather about heart transplants. I am still trying to get the book from a library and need to wait. With the holidays coming, no book buying for me right now. :-) I do want to read it and other related research, and maybe compare to the Abhidhamma's heart-base position (which I may contact you off-list for clarification if that is okay) and then post about it. It is a fascinating subject. I just wanted you to know that it wasn't a dead issue. I, for one, am very interested, but probably won't be able to respond for a while. Metta, James 17054 From: nidive Date: Wed Nov 20, 2002 7:04am Subject: Hello ... Hi All, This is my first post to dhammastudygroup. Robert introduced me to this group. I am Singaporean, male, age 25, single. I am very interested in Theravada Buddhism, especially the Abhidhamma. To Nina van Gorkom, are you really the author of the excellent book Abhidhamma In Daily Life? It's a lovely book on Abhidhamma and its the first book that really explained what the Dhamma is really all about. I have read lots of explanations on the Dhamma and none could really satisfy me until I read this book. Many thanks to you, Nina. I made very much progress on the Dhamma after reading it. 17055 From: Date: Wed Nov 20, 2002 2:18am Subject: Re: [dsg] To Jon: Question About "Accumulations" Hi, Jon - In a message dated 11/20/02 6:57:07 AM Eastern Standard Time, jonoabb@y... writes: > > Howard > > I think your question is, Where do the latent tendencies hide when > they are not manifesting? > -------------------------------------------- Howard: That is a way of putting it, though not quite how I would put it because it has a substantialist flavor to it. Perhaps closer to what I mean is "What functions/cetasikas participate in the mechanism we *call* accumulations?" (I would imagine that some cetasikas are direct participants, while others serve as necessary auxilliary conditions for manifestation of tendencies.) It seems to me that cetanas are central to this, and that they are likely quite complex in effect. If enough factors are involved, each of a number of types, then combinatorially it is feasible that the class of possible accumulations be huge. It seems to me that such would be required to explain the great diversity of possible inclinations among people. --------------------------------------------- > > I don't know the answer to this ;-)). I don’t even know if the > question is 'admissible' (I suspect not!). I haven't seen or heard > this discussed anywhere, except for mention of the fact that the > 'passing on' of previous experiences is possible because of the fully > contiguous nature of succeeding moments of consciousness (i.e., 'no > gap in between'). Other than that I can't be of any help, I'm > afraid. > > Are you asking because you see it as something that needs to be > known, or because you find it difficult to accept? > ------------------------------------------------- Howard: The former. It is easy for me to accept that our minds are conditioned and have "accumulations" (or tendencies to act and react in specific ways) which are "passed on". In fact, it is obviously so. I am merely interested in more precisely knowing the mechanism. I am a mathematician and scientist by trade, and I am interested in knowing the"how" of things. Abhidhamma is quite detailed on many matters, and this seems to be an exception. ------------------------------------------------- > > Jon > ========================== With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17056 From: Date: Wed Nov 20, 2002 2:26am Subject: Re: [dsg] How do you prove that Buddha is real Hi, ajahn_paul - In a message dated 11/20/02 8:11:22 AM Eastern Standard Time, ajahn_paul@y... writes: > > Hi all, > > im not trying to do anything to prove that Buddha is real,, i just > want to tell a short story!!!! > > Once upon a time, in a very beautiful ocean, fish mommy and fish > daughter were playing in front of their house, and they started a > little chat..... > > *** d=daughter, m=mommy *** > > d: mom, can i ask u a question? > m: of cause honey! go ahead. > d: i heard my friends said, fish lives in the sea. > m: so??? > d: so, where is the sea,, can u take me there and have a look? > > > And now,, i guess we all know where is Buddha,, and also the Dhamma! > ^____^ > > ======================== Excellent! A good story for grown-up kids as well as children. Nagarjuna, who said that samsara = nibbana, would like it too. We are all poor fish who just can't see what is right in front of us! As the Zen masters say, "Look! Look!" ;-) With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream./ (From the Diamond Sutra) 17057 From: ajahn_paul Date: Wed Nov 20, 2002 7:51am Subject: Re: [dsg] How do you prove that Buddha is real well... its kind of funny,, and also its a little bit upset that ppl who found they were lost, or they even didnt aware that they were lost! sometimes when we felt that we were lost,,, we may walking in the right path already. on the other hand,, some ppl would think that they were walking on the right path, unfortunately they were lost! :( --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., upasaka@a... wrote: > Hi, ajahn_paul - > > In a message dated 11/20/02 8:11:22 AM Eastern Standard Time, > ajahn_paul@y... writes: > > > > > Hi all, > > > > im not trying to do anything to prove that Buddha is real,, i just > > want to tell a short story!!!! > > > > Once upon a time, in a very beautiful ocean, fish mommy and fish > > daughter were playing in front of their house, and they started a > > little chat..... > > > > *** d=daughter, m=mommy *** > > > > d: mom, can i ask u a question? > > m: of cause honey! go ahead. > > d: i heard my friends said, fish lives in the sea. > > m: so??? > > d: so, where is the sea,, can u take me there and have a look? > > > > > > And now,, i guess we all know where is Buddha,, and also the Dhamma! > > ^____^ > > > > > ======================== > Excellent! A good story for grown-up kids as well as children. > Nagarjuna, who said that samsara = nibbana, would like it too. > We are all poor fish who just can't see what is right in front of us! > As the Zen masters say, "Look! Look!" ;-) > > With metta, > Howard 17058 From: rjkjp1 Date: Wed Nov 20, 2002 7:56am Subject: Re: Hello ... Dear ndive,\ Really glad you made it here. I would never have guessed you were only 25 after our exchanges on Dhamma. Nina is a great help to so many of us for a long time. Best wishes robert In dhammastudygroup@y..., "nidive" wrote: > Hi All, > > This is my first post to dhammastudygroup. > > Robert introduced me to this group. > > I am Singaporean, male, age 25, single. > > I am very interested in Theravada Buddhism, especially the > Abhidhamma. > > To Nina van Gorkom, are you really the author of the excellent book > Abhidhamma In Daily Life? It's a lovely book on Abhidhamma and its > the first book that really explained what the Dhamma is really all > about. I have read lots of explanations on the Dhamma and none could > really satisfy me until I read this book. Many thanks to you, Nina. > I made very much progress on the Dhamma after reading it. 17059 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Nov 20, 2002 10:07am Subject: Way 26, tadanga vinaya Dear Larry, you had a question about the following: I think it was about tadanga vinaya? I looked in Nyanatiloka: five kinds of pahaana, and two kinds are mundane. The tadanga is by insight: through the stages of insight, you can find these in the Vis. Eternity is overcome by realizing the arising and falling away of nama and rupa, etc. It is said in the sub Co. that here is pointed out the preliminary practice of the mundane Path. I liked your remark about Way 25, pointing out the courage needed: < Abandoning "the discontent rooted in bodily misery, the non-delight in the culture of body contemplation, and the desire to turn away from facing the real ugliness, suffering, impermanence and insubstantiality of the body" (and feeling, citta & dhamma) might necessitate a certain amount of bravery, if not fearlessness. This would relate to our previous threads on fear. Also it is interesting that anatta is counted as an undesirable.> N: We need to be reminded often of courage, courage to continue investigating what appears now. We should not mind our lack of progress, it is condiitoned. Anatta is counted as an undesirable. We like self so much and cling to it. We are afraid to lose self when we die. Remember A. Sompong's remark about fear of death to Rob K: without personality belief no fear of death. Nina. 17060 From: christine_forsyth Date: Wed Nov 20, 2002 10:23am Subject: Re: Hello ... Hello ndive, Nice to see you here, welcome. I have enjoyed your posts in the past and I look forward to any contributions you may care to make to the discussions on dsg. metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "nidive" wrote: > Hi All, > > This is my first post to dhammastudygroup. > > Robert introduced me to this group. > > I am Singaporean, male, age 25, single. > > I am very interested in Theravada Buddhism, especially the > Abhidhamma. > > To Nina van Gorkom, are you really the author of the excellent book > Abhidhamma In Daily Life? It's a lovely book on Abhidhamma and its > the first book that really explained what the Dhamma is really all > about. I have read lots of explanations on the Dhamma and none could > really satisfy me until I read this book. Many thanks to you, Nina. > I made very much progress on the Dhamma after reading it. 17061 From: christine_forsyth Date: Wed Nov 20, 2002 10:39am Subject: Re: Consciousness and the heart base Hello James, I'm glad my mention of the book was helpful - I haven't read the book yet and I would be interested in your thoughts on it at any time. I know it was written for popular consumption and so may lack a cerrtain rigour, but it states it includes the results of some recent research. So often the things in the Teachings that seem different to what 'modern' science declares as truth are not wrong - just waiting for science to catch up :), or at least use the same language. Even if the book disappoints in some way but serves as a jumping off point for further reading and reflection, and if it throws a new light on the truth of the Teachings, it is worthwhile. Newest is not always 'more true'. All we have to do is not close our minds. metta, Christine --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "James" wrote: > --- In dhammastudygroup@y..., "christine_forsyth" > wrote: > > Dear Group, > > > > I wonder if anyone has read "The Heart's Code: Tapping the Wisdom > and > > Power of Our Heart Energy: The New Findings About Cellular > Memories > > and Their Role in the Mind/Body/Spirit" by Paul Pearsall? > > I haven't, but it seems possibly relevant to the post that TG made > to > > James. > > > Christine, > > This post has fascinated me since you posted it. I have been > reading about this particular book and its position ever since. I > stayed up until 4:00 am in the morning the night you posted it! I > was reading about the book, its author, and trying to get all of the > information I could gather about heart transplants. I am still > trying to get the book from a library and need to wait. With the > holidays coming, no book buying for me right now. :-) I do want to > read it and other related research, and maybe compare to the > Abhidhamma's heart-base position (which I may contact you off-list > for clarification if that is okay) and then post about it. It is a > fascinating subject. I just wanted you to know that it wasn't a > dead issue. I, for one, am very interested, but probably won't be > able to respond for a while. > > Metta, James 17062 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Nov 20, 2002 11:02am Subject: Re: [dsg] Hello ... Dear Nidive, wellcome to the group. Thank you for your kind words and I am glad my book could help you. It is good to discuss more about the Abhidhamma and exchange views. Best wishes Nina op 20-11-2002 16:04 schreef nidive op nidive@y...: > To Nina van Gorkom, are you really the author of the excellent book > Abhidhamma In Daily Life? 17063 From: Date: Wed Nov 20, 2002 2:14pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Proximate Cause of Unpleasant Mental Feeling Hi Sarah, Thanks for the info. Just to clarify, is every immediately preceding citta a proximity conditition (anantara paccaya) and every immediately preceding anything (dhamma or combination of dhammas) a proximate cause (padatthana)? Larry 17064 From: yu_zhonghao Date: Wed Nov 20, 2002 3:14pm Subject: Nama Rupa Hi all, I have been thinking for the last couple days about the meaning of "nama-rupa" and would like to write down some ideas. 1. The Sanskrit/Pali word "nama", the English word "name", the German word "Name", and the French word "Nom" all share the same root in the linguistic family of Indo-European languages. The Chinese translated "nama-rupa" as "ming-se", where "ming" means "name" in English, and "se" literally means "color". The compound word "nama- rupa" has been translated as "name-and-form" in some literature and "mentality-materiality" in other. Whether the word "nama" is translated as "name" or "mentality" in English, questions remain: what does it mean by "nama"? What does it mean by "rupa"? 2. Name is representation. Rupa is what is being represented. There are representations of representations. In other words, nama and rupa are relational. They are not two categories with some number of elements. 3. Representation of something is possible only when there is consciousness, and representations are representation through six modalities of senses (five modalities of bodily senses plus the modality of intellect.) I look forward to some discussion on the meaning of nama-rupa. Have a good day, Victor 17065 From: James Date: Wed Nov 20, 2002 3:27pm Subject: Re: Buddhism question( please reply) Hi Star Kid! (AKA Philip) Your letter is very interesting. You have a lot of questions, and that is good. I am going to try to answer your questions after what you wrote. I also want to give you a few helpful hints about writing letters to people asking for things like information, especially adults. I am sure you won't mind. You are obviously a very clever and smart boy. Dear guys: (Philip, you can call your friends `guys', but you shouldn't do that with adults. You should address adults as "Dear Sirs or Madams; or Dear Members of DSG" I'm positive you didn't mean harm by addressing adults as `guys' and are being friendly, but showing the highest respect to adults and teachers is very important in life. It is the guidance and love of adults that will guarantee you a good future. I am sure you understand now and are clever enough to do this in the future- and teach your classmates the proper way also. I am counting on you to pass this on. :-). I'm Philip Chui, and I think I have introduced myself in the last letter I sent to you guys already. I have some questions about Buddhism: 1. Who is the god in Buddhism? How many forms of the god does your religion have?( In Christianity, we have three: The father, the son and the holy spirit ). (Philip, since you don't capitalize `God', I am assuming that you mean any kind of god and not just the one `true creator God'. Well, let me tell you Philip, by being Christian you are missing out on having a lot of gods! Buddhism has LOTS AND LOTS of gods…and lots of demons…and lots of ghosts!! And they are all very interesting too! They glow in the dark, don't have to eat food that much, and don't have to sleep for months at a time! They live in other worlds and, if you are a Buddha, you can travel to them with the power of your mind; much like a `transporter' in Star Trek, but with no machines! And depending on the type of Buddhist, especially Tibetan Buddhist, there are also a lot of enlightened Buddhas and other higher beings living in other worlds. But none have been as supreme as LORD BUDDHA, Siddhartha. He existed for eons and eons (American spelling ;-) to bring the ultimate and final truth to the world. To most Buddhists, he is the only Lord, king, and god…as you are thinking. But, and this is very important to understand Philip, all of the gods, devas, ghosts, demons, and silent Buddhas in Buddhism are no better than human beings. Yep, hard to understand but true. They were humans before being gods, and will probably be humans again. Actually, they are jealous of humans because humans can be Buddhas more easily and they can't.) 2. What is the belief in Buddhism? (The Lord Buddha taught the belief of Buddhism in his first sermon. This belief is called "The Four Noble Truths". They are: 1: We are all suffering, 2: This suffering is caused by us all wanting things to be what they aren't, 3: There is a way to stop this suffering, 4: The Eightfold Path, which is a way to see and accept things as they really are.) 3. When you die, where do you go, according to your religion? (If you are a regular person, you are reborn into a body with the same attributes you had when you died. If you are a Buddha and see things as they really are, you are not reborn but enter a state of existence called `Parinibbana'. I am not sure what that is like because I haven't been there. I have only read a few `brief postcards' sent from Buddhas who have seen it. It is supposed to be a great place! I want to go there one day. Maybe I will see you! ;- ) 4. How do you prove that Buddha is real? (We don't need to prove that the Buddha is real; after all, inside, we are all Buddhas. He said, "I am this", and we say, "Oh, I am that too!" So we know the Lord Buddha is real because we know that we are real. I know I am real anyway. Are you??? Hehehe…just kidding. I know you are real too. The Buddha is real because we are all real. Jesus was real too. And God is real also, in a certain view. The only thing that isn't real is ignorance of such things. May we all be freed of the `unreality' of ignorance.) Thanks a lot for reading my letters. If you have any questions about my religion ( Christianity ), do not hestitate to tell me. (I have one question Philip. Jesus said that a person `must be like a little child' to enter the Kingdom of Heaven. Since you are a kid, I want to ask you, what do you think he meant by that?) Yours sincerely, Ph